Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Religious conversions in India

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Freedom of religion in India. Jenks24 (talk) 12:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Religious conversions in India

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

First, the article is biased towards hinduism and secondly all the points pointed out is covered in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_India#Laws_against_conversions hence can be merged with that article Naveed (talk) 10:59, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ugh. NPOV is lacking both in the article and in the proposed redirect target. Someone really needs to write a good treatment of the topic in a neutral and encyclopedic voice. Jclemens (talk) 06:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with you. Tried correcting it but found it to be in very bad shape. Someone should edit it completely , else should be deleted.--Naveed (talk) 06:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Freedom of religion in India for now. As has been stated both articles need work with POV and sourcing, but this could be a valid sub-article.Synchronism (talk) 00:50, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Freedom of religion in India as the current article is deeply flawed. It's worth noting that each national-level law is inherently notable. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.